I'm considering flying my ultralight powered parachute in the sfra exclusion area. I have taken the FAA sfra course. I also have anti collision, as,well as position lights. I have communications. And I am exempt from a transponder. With all that said if I maintained a altitude just under the 1300 ft class Bravo, and wanted to transition the corridor would you see any reason that I could not? I would plan for the highest altitude so not to have any vortices or rotorcraft propwash blowing towards my chute, Plus since my average speed would be about 25 miles per hour I would prefer to let any other traffic zoom by under me. Thoughts?
Yeah. I don't think I'd want to be playing "sky tourist" in airspace like that and rubbernecking my way around NYC. That's how mid-airs like the one that led to that SFRA situation. I'm not a pilot but I've been an aviation fan my whole life and know a little about the VFR/IFR thing and I know that IFR and VFR are two separate things for a reason and that mixing them and then tossing in "sightseeing" is just asking for trouble. VFR pilots and airplanes are VFR for a reason. They're not capable of or interested in or designed for "serious" flying.
DEEREMEYER1 I kind of disagree. The midair collision happened because of the lack of organization in the area. The SFRA has, at least so far, proved it’s success in preventing further midair’s. The whole point of this SFRA is to allow VFR pilots an opportunity to give other people amazing views without dealing with the hassle of IFR flying. Flying in places like this literally gives meaning to flying airplanes... actually enjoying it and bringing joy to others rather than just flying from point A to point B. I am a pilot and intend to fly the SFRA soon.
You need to first understand the terms you are talking about before making sweeping statements like the one above. Oh wait, this is the Internet - as you were.
Great video. Thanks
Very helpful thanks, and what about Destin FL SFRA??
I'm considering flying my ultralight powered parachute in the sfra exclusion area.
I have taken the FAA sfra course. I also have anti collision, as,well as position lights.
I have communications. And I am exempt from a transponder.
With all that said if I maintained a altitude just under the 1300 ft class Bravo, and wanted to transition the corridor would you see any reason that I could not?
I would plan for the highest altitude so not to have any vortices or rotorcraft propwash blowing towards my chute, Plus since my average speed would be about 25 miles per hour I would prefer to let any other traffic zoom by under me. Thoughts?
Yeah. I don't think I'd want to be playing "sky tourist" in airspace like that and rubbernecking my way around NYC. That's how mid-airs like the one that led to that SFRA situation. I'm not a pilot but I've been an aviation fan my whole life and know a little about the VFR/IFR thing and I know that IFR and VFR are two separate things for a reason and that mixing them and then tossing in "sightseeing" is just asking for trouble. VFR pilots and airplanes are VFR for a reason. They're not capable of or interested in or designed for "serious" flying.
DEEREMEYER1 you can always start in the glider
DEEREMEYER1
I kind of disagree. The midair collision happened because of the lack of organization in the area. The SFRA has, at least so far, proved it’s success in preventing further midair’s. The whole point of this SFRA is to allow VFR pilots an opportunity to give other people amazing views without dealing with the hassle of IFR flying. Flying in places like this literally gives meaning to flying airplanes... actually enjoying it and bringing joy to others rather than just flying from point A to point B. I am a pilot and intend to fly the SFRA soon.
You need to first understand the terms you are talking about before making sweeping statements like the one above. Oh wait, this is the Internet - as you were.